On Sun, 3 Mar 2019 11:08:32 -0700, "Bill in Co"
surly_curmudgeon@earthlink wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:
On Sat, 2 Mar 2019 21:35:27 -0700, "Bill in Co"
surly_curmudgeon@earthlink wrote:

Mayayana wrote:
"pyotr filipivich" wrote

So far, I have found one thing Word does, which WP doesn't: break
a large brochure up into signatures. But all the rest, - ?ave you
ever tried to track down where the style change was made which is
screwing up the document?"

You lost me there. I used to use WordPro from a magazine
CD. Then I switched to OO and now Libre Office. But I
only use it a bit, to write out receipts, contracts, bills, etc.
I made the template files years ago, so I've never really had
to master office programs.

Did you ever consider the much leaner Kingston Office (aka WPS Office
now), or Softmaker Free Office? They are both a LOT less bloated then
either OpenOffice or LibreOffice, but may not have everything you need,
not sure. Just wondering.



It's very common for someone to complain about some particular program
being "bloated." What they mean by that, I assume, is that it consumes
a lot of disk space.

My personal view is that that's nonsense. Back when I got my first
computer in 1987, it had a 20MB disk drive, and the space a program
used was very significant. But these days it means nothing. Word and
WordPerfect each use about 1GB of disk space. At today's disk prices,
when a 1TB drive costs around $50 USD (less per GB, for bigger drives)
1GB of disk space is about 5 cents worth. If my quick look at the
amount of disk space each uses was wrong, multiply the numbers by 10
if you like, and make it 50 cents each; I still wouldn't care.

I have two 2GB drives on my computer, and they cost around $60 each.
That lowers the cost of the disk space each uses to around 3 cents.

We should be concerned with what a program does, whether it meets our
needs, how stable it is, how fast it is, how easy it is to use, how
comfortable we are with its GUI, etc., not with how much disk space it
uses.

Your assumption was only partially correct. By bloated, I mean hog wise in
terms of resources used and responsiveness.



Also not an issue with modern computers, as far as I'm concerned. I
don't run or know of know any program that runs too slowly for me.


So mostly that, but in
addition to the filesize, which is only secondary. And yes, I am concerned
about what the program does, and how much extra junk has been added in there
to dull down my experience of using their program (like needless eye candy,
or extra baggage functions of little use, such as (you want a good one?
social app crap access)


Yes, there's some of that in some programs. I wouldn't call it bloat,
but I agree with you there.


I also had only a 10 GB HD back then too. Actually, I didn't have a hard
drive at all, with the original IBM PC, and was swapping out 5.25 floppy
disks for a "large" program to run, until some friend came over and gave me
a 10 GB HD, and I then was in heaven. No need to swap out floppy disks for
some program to run anymore!



Yes, I remember those things too. The world has changed! And it will
change more tomorrow.